Source: Lisa M. Keefe, MEATINGPLACE, 4/22/14


Several briefs have been filed this week in the lawsuit over the enforcement of current mandatory country of origin labeling requirements. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear arguments en banc over the question of whether enforcement by the USDA should be stayed while the legality of the regulations themselves is argued at the Circuit Court level.

The meat organizations, including the American Meat Institute, the North American Meat Association, the American Association of Meat Processors, as well as beef- and pork-specific groups and representatives of the Canadian and Mexican sectors — nine groups in all — filed a 31-page brief outlining their arguments for a legal halt to enforcement.

The National Farmers Union, the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, the Consumer Federation of America and the American Sheep Industry Association filed their brief on Monday, outlining their arguments for why the regulations’ enforcement should proceed. And amicus briefs have been filed by a host of other players, including the Government of Canada, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Center for Science in the Public Interest, the National Association of County and City Health Officials, and others.

Those groups’ interest in the debate is in their contention that more disclosure enables consumers to make better choices related to their health, much the way that more information about the effects of smoking has had an effect on consumers’ decision to take up the habit.

“It is undoubtedly true that many disclosure requirements originated in response to ongoing patterns of serious deception — an continue to provide essential protection against such deception. But it is also true that disclosure requirements serve many other vital interests besides averting deception, interest that include healthy and safety, individual autonomy exercised through informed decision-making, transparent marketis, environmental protection, and personal privacy, to name a few,” the amicus brief said.

The oral arguments before the appellate court judges is scheduled for May 19, and each side will have 30 minutes to present their case. The specific issue that the panel is to consider is whether the COOL regulations constitute a form of compelled speech that is allowable under the First Amendment.

For more stories, go to www.meatingplace.com.